If I'm coming from a T20 with decent research output (12 clinical retrospective papers, few first author) and mostly honors on rotations, what is the minimum score on 2CK I should have before applying?
I'm in dedicated but would rather postpone 2CK and take a research year if I don't achieve an adequate practice test score prior to the test.
Mostly aiming for mid-tier programs like Rutgers (though it's really hard to differentiate tiers outside of the high tiers)
thanks
Mid tier like Rutgers?? They have been on probation for the last year. Lost most of their faculty. You should have an easy time with that place. And good luck on scrambling to Barrow once they close.
Rutgers is fairly bottom for the barrel these days. Won’t stay that way forever, all programs ebb and flow, but I certainly wouldn’t describe it as mid tier
It’s hard to gauge what’s “low tier” versus “mid tier.” There’s Doximity but a lot of people seem to disagree with it. I’ve also seen several posts on here with a lot of variance in ranking.
240 step at least for mid tier, but could still match around 235. What are your practice scores averaging?
U will be at a disadvantage trying to match with a 235. Not impossible, but as a reviewer I can tell u it’s not a score I have much respect for.
Can ~90 ERAS research items (papers, posters, abstracts, etc) make up for a 235 step 2 if you're aiming to match to a mid-tier program coming from a mid-tier med school?
Not really. “Research items” is the equivalent of a participation trophy. They don’t mean much. Publications can make up for a poor step score, but only so much. Personally, I just look briefly at publications to make sure the applicant has at least gotten a few, but honestly I don’t really care if they have 3 good pubs or 90 good pubs. Granted, not all reviewers will have the same philosophy, but after a few publications, in my opinion it’s diminishing returns. I don’t give a $hit about “research items”. Other than step score and pubs, I look at letters to make sure there aren’t any red flag comments (all reviewers know how to read between the lines), and I look at ur medical school performance, to make sure ur at least honoring or high-passing most courses (unless the school is pass/fail). Other than that, the interview is also a big deal, to make sure ur a socially normal human being who won’t alienate patients, family, and colleagues. You could have all the publications in the world, but if ur socially incompetent and I don’t think you’ll fit in well or be a good clinician, I’m not ranking you.
And before someone starts asking about med school rankings, I legit don’t even bother looking at where u went to med school, it simply does not matter. All the best applicants are from the tops of their classes, I don’t care if ur from a state school or Harvard. Makes zero difference. The only reason I’ll sometimes even obliquely check is to see if I happen to know a colleague at the home institution who might be able to give me additional assent/insight into whether or not ur any good, but even then I can usually get that from ur away rotation letters/institutions.
I know someone who matched with a 208 at a top program several years ago. Granted, he had played in the NFL, won a Rhodes scholarship, and wrote a book, but it is possible.
